Australia captain Steve Smith says West Indies rebuffed a creative plan to revive the rain-hit third Test after it petered out in a draw at the SCG on Thursday.

External Link: Australia v West Indies third Test SCG scoreboard

Smith said he approached his opposite number Jason Holder with an offer to declare at 0 for 0 and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play.
———————————————————————————-

I cant believe that, that’s Match Fixing.

“and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play”

And just how the hell was he going to do that without ordering his players not to play to their potential.
It’s cheating and match fixing and goes against everything that is cricket.
It’s appaling that an Auystralian test captain would rig a game.
I’m glad it was rejected, Smith should be sacked forthwith.

Peak Warming Man said:

Australia captain Steve Smith says West Indies rebuffed a creative plan to revive the rain-hit third Test after it petered out in a draw at the SCG on Thursday.

External Link: Australia v West Indies third Test SCG scoreboard

Smith said he approached his opposite number Jason Holder with an offer to declare at 0 for 0 and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play.
———————————————————————————-

I cant believe that, that’s Match Fixing.

“and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play”

And just how the hell was he going to do that without ordering his players not to play to their potential.
It’s cheating and match fixing and goes against everything that is cricket.
It’s appaling that an Auystralian test captain would rig a game.
I’m glad it was rejected, Smith should be sacked forthwith.

It is a grey area. It would have increased the chances for a result.

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Australia captain Steve Smith says West Indies rebuffed a creative plan to revive the rain-hit third Test after it petered out in a draw at the SCG on Thursday.

External Link: Australia v West Indies third Test SCG scoreboard

Smith said he approached his opposite number Jason Holder with an offer to declare at 0 for 0 and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play.
———————————————————————————-

I cant believe that, that’s Match Fixing.

“and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play”

And just how the hell was he going to do that without ordering his players not to play to their potential.
It’s cheating and match fixing and goes against everything that is cricket.
It’s appaling that an Auystralian test captain would rig a game.
I’m glad it was rejected, Smith should be sacked forthwith.

It is a grey area. It would have increased the chances for a result.

There is nothing grey about it at all it is asking your players to run dead, to take a dive to manufacture an outcome.
It’s match fixing.

I hate to see stuff like that happen. As for the offer itself, there is really only one team that could win it from that scenario and that is Australia. If Australia lost a few early wickets they could just stop chasing and play defensively for a draw. I don’t think the scenario offered the West Indies a realistic chance at winning, so I’m not surprised they rejected it. As they should.

Being a two team series there is no place for sporting declarations anyway. They only work in competitions with multiple teams, where teams are competing for ladder positions and finals, when both sides need to win to advance their cause against all other teams.

party_pants said:

I hate to see stuff like that happen. As for the offer itself, there is really only one team that could win it from that scenario and that is Australia. If Australia lost a few early wickets they could just stop chasing and play defensively for a draw. I don’t think the scenario offered the West Indies a realistic chance at winning, so I’m not surprised they rejected it. As they should.

Being a two team series there is no place for sporting declarations anyway. They only work in competitions with multiple teams, where teams are competing for ladder positions and finals, when both sides need to win to advance their cause against all other teams.

It can improve each team’s chance of the win by taking the draw out.

Peak Warming Man said:

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Australia captain Steve Smith says West Indies rebuffed a creative plan to revive the rain-hit third Test after it petered out in a draw at the SCG on Thursday.

External Link: Australia v West Indies third Test SCG scoreboard

Smith said he approached his opposite number Jason Holder with an offer to declare at 0 for 0 and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play.
———————————————————————————-

I cant believe that, that’s Match Fixing.

“and then allow the tourists to build a 370-run lead with 70 overs to play”

And just how the hell was he going to do that without ordering his players not to play to their potential.
It’s cheating and match fixing and goes against everything that is cricket.
It’s appaling that an Auystralian test captain would rig a game.
I’m glad it was rejected, Smith should be sacked forthwith.

It is a grey area. It would have increased the chances for a result.

There is nothing grey about it at all it is asking your players to run dead, to take a dive to manufacture an outcome.
It’s match fixing.

Very well then.

I see El Chapo is back in prison for another weekend.

dv said:

party_pants said:

I hate to see stuff like that happen. As for the offer itself, there is really only one team that could win it from that scenario and that is Australia. If Australia lost a few early wickets they could just stop chasing and play defensively for a draw. I don’t think the scenario offered the West Indies a realistic chance at winning, so I’m not surprised they rejected it. As they should.

Being a two team series there is no place for sporting declarations anyway. They only work in competitions with multiple teams, where teams are competing for ladder positions and finals, when both sides need to win to advance their cause against all other teams.

It can improve each team’s chance of the win by taking the draw out.

I disagree. It removes the draw as an option for WI, but not for Aus. Aus always have the draw as their fall-back option if the run chase doesn’t go well. They don’t have to keep on attacking if they find themselves at 7/150, they can switch to defensive mode and play out time.

party_pants said:

dv said:

party_pants said:

I hate to see stuff like that happen. As for the offer itself, there is really only one team that could win it from that scenario and that is Australia. If Australia lost a few early wickets they could just stop chasing and play defensively for a draw. I don’t think the scenario offered the West Indies a realistic chance at winning, so I’m not surprised they rejected it. As they should.

Being a two team series there is no place for sporting declarations anyway. They only work in competitions with multiple teams, where teams are competing for ladder positions and finals, when both sides need to win to advance their cause against all other teams.

It can improve each team’s chance of the win by taking the draw out.

I disagree. It removes the draw as an option for WI, but not for Aus. Aus always have the draw as their fall-back option if the run chase doesn’t go well. They don’t have to keep on attacking if they find themselves at 7/150, they can switch to defensive mode and play out time.

If you are 7/150 you can’t guarantee a draw, you are three good rocks from death.

dv said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

It can improve each team’s chance of the win by taking the draw out.

I disagree. It removes the draw as an option for WI, but not for Aus. Aus always have the draw as their fall-back option if the run chase doesn’t go well. They don’t have to keep on attacking if they find themselves at 7/150, they can switch to defensive mode and play out time.

If you are 7/150 you can’t guarantee a draw, you are three good rocks from death.

Perhaps I should pick a different figure then. Aus are 6/320 chasing a target of 370, with 10 overs left. They lose a wicket – they have the choice of continuing on with the chase or deciding to bat out 10 overs for the draw. They are not compelled to keep attacking.

The batting side has the advantage of initiative in this regard, the bowling team don’t. I don’t think it offers an equal chance to both sides. I would have rejected it too.

dv said:

I see El Chapo is back in prison for another weekend.

He needed a holiday from his stressful job

If I was an Australian bowler and the captain came to me and asked me to play dead, bowl aq bit of rubbish and not take wickets, let them get to 370 because I’ve got a deal with the other captain I’d tell him to get fucked.
I’d tell him that this is probably the end of my test career………………………….or yours.

• If I was an Australian bowler and the captain came to me and asked me to play dead, bowl aq bit of rubbish and not take wickets, let them get to 370 because I’ve got a deal with the other captain I’d tell him to get fucked.
  I’d tell him that this is probably the end of my test career………………………….or yours.

Yep…

should’ve just reset the score to zero and played a 1 dayer on the last day

To make a game of it smith should have said, if you declare right now, we will declare right now and you can bat again, give them a head start, if you’re going to fix it, that would have made it more interesting…

I don’t see why a game needed to be made of it anyway. The 3-match series was already decided 2-0, so a result either way would have changed nothing. I think it was just Australian egos wanting to make it 3-0.

How was the run out…

http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/domestic-cricket/adam-zampa-run-out-video-peter-nevill-dismissed-after-stars-spinners-nasty-nose-knock/story-fn5k3es5-1227703118612

• I don’t see why a game needed to be made of it anyway.

Entertainment for the folks that still find (test) cricket interesting…

stumpy_seahorse said:

How was the run out…

Must have hurt. I cringed watching the replay.

furious said:

• I don’t see why a game needed to be made of it anyway.

Entertainment for the folks that still find (test) cricket interesting…

The exact opposite actually, the purists do not want to see test cricket compromised with rigged results.

party_pants said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

How was the run out…

Must have hurt. I cringed watching the replay.

yeah, I put a tooth through my lip yesterday, that hurt enough.. let alone a cricket ball at speed in the schnozz

• The exact opposite actually, the purists do not want to see test cricket compromised with rigged results.

Supposedly the first 50/50 game was the last day of a test match ruined by rain or whatever…

furious said:

• I don’t see why a game needed to be made of it anyway.

Entertainment for the folks that still find (test) cricket interesting…

I’d prefer to see test records unsullied by set-up scenarios. Savey Warner’s hundred counts as entertainment.

furious said:

• The exact opposite actually, the purists do not want to see test cricket compromised with rigged results.

Supposedly the first 50/50 game was the last day of a test match ruined by rain or whatever…

Yes, that is correct. Calling off the test match ans staging an exhibition game is different. The results don’t count towards the record books. Gigging the test match to set-up a run-chase the records would still count, which I don’t like.

furious said:

• The exact opposite actually, the purists do not want to see test cricket compromised with rigged results.

Supposedly the first 50/50 game was the last day of a test match ruined by rain or whatever…

Yeah that’s the way to do it, shake hands on the test match and play a limited over game for the crowd and TV on the last day.

• Gigging the test match to set-up a run-chase the records would still count, which I don’t like.

Especially when Dave Wanker gets into the history books…

Good call by Smith, but the WI didn’t take up the offer to protect their losing record.